Where was the U.S during the genocide that took place in Rwanda.?

Question

I'm reading an incredible book written by a survivor of the Rwandan Holocaust. What was America's take on that awful event? How much did we involve ourselves? I just don't remember that much about it. And after reading this book, I am ashamed that I recall very little about this atrocity.

Does anyone have any insight?

If you are interested the book is called: "Left to Tell-Discovering God Amidst the Rwandan Holocaust." By Immaculee Ilibbagiza.

Answer 1

look at Rwanda. it is in a terrible place: a landlocked country in central Africa and is so small. it is in no way a tactical place to be. it has no shore to dock ships and no oil or mineral reserves. unfortunately, helping them would have been a waste of time and funds (military and tactically speaking).

so, on to Hitlers genocide. Hitler was a very clear threat and was more than capable of taking over all of mainland Europe during the beginning of the war. thats why we stopped Hitler.

also, Clinton tried helping an African country back in 1993. remember Somalia and Black Hawk Down? Clinton didnt help Rwanda in '94 because he wanted to avoid a similar incident.

Answer 2

Bruce B. first of all, let me apologise for being cruel with you in a question about a guy who was trying to escape from cops. I was kidding, I'm really sorry. sense of humour. But now with your question you're right, where was all the whole world when it happened? Let me tell you that months ago I watched Hotel Rwanda and some tears escaped from my eyes. The film is Called Hotel Rwanda about a hotel owner, Don Cheadle, who saved over 1,000 people during the 1994 Rwanda genocide. When this happened I was ten and I barely recall. But now I see, not only America, but England, my royal land didn't do anything.
I'm ashamed too. Maybe These people couldn't offer oil. That's why.

Answer 3

we were sitting around pretending it wasn't happening. the following is an example of how our government refused to call it genocide because if they actually did, we would have had to do something about it:

Christine Shelly, a State Department spokesperson, had long been charged with publicly articulating the U.S. position on whether events in Rwanda counted as genocide. For two months she had avoided the term, and as her June 10 exchange with the Reuters correspondent Alan Elsner reveals, her semantic dance continued.

Elsner: How would you describe the events taking place in Rwanda?

Shelly: Based on the evidence we have seen from observations on the ground, we have every reason to believe that acts of genocide have occurred in Rwanda.

Elsner: What's the difference between "acts of genocide" and "genocide"?

Shelly: Well, I think ... as you know, there's a legal definition of this ... clearly not all of the killings that have taken place in Rwanda are killings to which you might apply that label ... But as to the distinctions between the words, we're trying to call what we have seen so far as best as we can; and based, again, on the evidence, we have every reason to believe that acts of genocide have occurred.

Elsner: How many acts of genocide does it take to make genocide?

Shelly: Alan, that's just not a question that I'm in a position to answer.

The same day, in Istanbul, Warren Christopher, by then under severe internal and external pressure, relented: "If there is any particular magic in calling it genocide, I have no hesitancy in saying that."

Answer 4

Taking care of our own sweet azz. Political pressure only. Genocide is a terrible thing & the UN is obligated to take action up to & including military peacekeepers to stop it. The US does not use force unless it is in the interests of the US, and that goes for every other country too - sooo the UN is pretty poerless when the only troops it has come from a country that would have to feel the move was in its own interests.

Iraq is a good example I'm sure will be cited by others in here. There were acts of genocide that occured in Iraq & we sure didn't like it, but not until use of military force was in the US interests did we send troops to bring the parties to justice.

Answer 5

No one in the U.S. seems to care about African countries... Clinton went into Somalia with the UN and did some good, but after the "black hawk down" incident all the conservatives cried that "our boys are being murdered" (Delay and co.-after 20 deaths mind you) and we pulled them back out and never really did much in Africa since then... Clinton was a little "gun-shy" about Africa after getting hit so hard by the Republicans for it...

now we're in Iraq... 2,500 deaths... but it's no big deal to the current Republicans...

I guess Republicans just don't like dying to help black people?

Answer 6

We made the mistake of following the UN's lead and letting them handle it. The UN is the most useless organization on Earth. It's because of incidents like Rwanda that we need to think for ourselves.

Answer 7

We were there...and then we were pulled out. I remember watching it on the news...there was a guy..can't remember his name, but he was on then Pres. Clinton's staff...he was "rescued"...for lack of a better term. It was a heroic moment, there was a big feeling of relief in the US...like, now we were safe. That is all I remember seeing about it..but I was younger and didn't watch news like I do now..I'm not ragging on Clinton...he was Pres at the time, that's just a fact.
Unfortunately, a similar situation is happening right now in Darfur...and how often do you see that on the news?

Answer 8

Watching Melrose Place or some other such show and not paying attentin because we have no economic interest in Rowanda. The pace for killing there was much greater than Hilter ever accomplished. 800,000 dead in what 2 months. Incredible!

Answer 9

I'm pretty sure we sat on our hands and did nothing, while we let the U.N. handle the situation. Never a good plan. But you saw how eager Clinton and Albright were to get involved in Bosnia, when white Europeans were being slaughtered!

Answer 10

the us was debating in the un about what is genocide, how much involvement is too much, how much money to spend, should un peacekeepers be helping to establish a govt, instead of stopping the killings in rwanda.